Dude, if you're against abortion then don't get an abortion. Stop trying to push your beliefs on others. As much as you think for yourself others can do the same and make decisions that affect their lives not yours. Next people will be anti self gratification since there is a potential human being there as well.

To each his own, we all have to answer one day for what we have done. I doubt you'll be answering for anyone but yourself. Then again, some people don't believe in a higher being and that's their choice as well.

Actually, it is an exact parallel. Everytime someone posts up pictures of aborted kids, they get ripped off the site. Why? Because they are people. They look like people. They are little people. Planned parenthood lies to women and they also will not let them see the ultrasound. All the excuses used to continue to justify it are intellectually dishonest and is just repeating things they refuse to learn anything about. So, If I or anyone else were to say mexicans are not people and they get in the way of my livelyhood and my happiness, then I should be able kill them right? Was hitler bad? Some would say he was doing the world a favor by aborting jews, gyspies and other non desirables right? The logical parallels are identical. Remember abortion was allowed (maybe still is) all the way up to near birth. For people like yourself to continue to say you support it based on the framing as a women's right issue are lying to yourself. If you look at the child based on it being a human, they all other analogies are relevant.

I am looking for a little honesty and research from absolute supporters. Look into planned parenthood a little closer. Look into the aftermath of thousands of women after the fact. It has devistated thousands of women and no one gives a crap about them after the fact. They are suffering from their choice in silence but it does not serve a political cause so they get no service. Many of the women after the fact say if they would have got the facts they would not have done it including the women that row vs wade about. IF you actually care about the women, then do the research.

Well you need to be careful with terms such as "life", taking of life in general is not considered wrong (eating for example) but "human life" is. So it is critical to define when human life begins, is it at conception? I personally don't think so, a collection of 4 cells smaller than a pin head does constitute a human in my eyes, "potential human" yes but human no. If you have an issue with stopping "potential humans" then you have an issue with birth control as well.

(How did I let myself get sucked into this)? We are all pro-life. However, most of us believe that the life and health of the expectant mother has priority over the life of the fetus. Some want to impute personhood to the fetus. Unfortunately, one can assign personhood to the fetus only to the extent that one is willing to deny personhood to the expectant mother. The fetus is only a human being to the extent that the expectant mother is not a human being.

The English Common Law was quite clear on this. Only those who were born alive had rights as human beings. Abortion was not a Common Law crime. Modernly, many jurisdictions recognize a viable fetus as a human being. A viable fetus is one capable of living outside the womb. This definition existed before heroic medical procedures were available to assist the survival of a permaturely born child. The conservative position on this legal issue is that a fetus requiring an incubator in order to survive outside the womb is not a viable fetus, and therefore not a human being.

It is fine if one takes a religious view that is contrary to what I just wrote. I cannot rule out the possibility that an omniscient Supreme Being might exist nor can I rule out the possibility that such an omniscient Being might espouse Keith's point of view. However, governments are, of course creations of human beings, and charged with the responsibility of creating and maintaining sound public policy. Human beings are not omniscient, nor infallible. Most, if not all of us, make mistakes frequently. I have a dim recollection that there is a passage in the Book that states "judge not lest ye be judged." Similarly, it is not good public policy for government to pass laws that cannot be enforced without taking a prurient interest in the private lives of the governed.

The elements of the crime of murder include, among other things, that the victim be a human being. Crimes of violence involve breaches of the peace. If someone shoots your neighbor, and that act goes unpunished, you may reasonably fear that a friend or relative of yours or you yourself may get shot. It is reasonable for society to pass judgment against those parties whose actions pose a threat to the community. Where is the threat to yourself or your family if your neighbor chooses to have an abortion?

A reasonable compromise on the issue of abortion was reached back in the early 1970's. It's called Roe v. Wade.

Good points. I would argue that life begins at the same time that it ends....when the heart stops beating and brain functions stops. So, when a fetus begins to have brain function and a heartbeat, it is alive. As soon as conception takes place, those cells have their own DNA different from both the mother and father essentially making it a unique human and not part of the mother. In my view aborting that fetus is murder...to me.

I agree with the TS that most abortions are not done in the interest of saving the mother. Most are done due to poor planning, irresponsibility and are the result of poor choices. If you want to play, you may have to pay. With all precautions in place (birth control, condoms, etc) the chances of pregnancy are very low. In the event that the female does get pregnant, her own bad choices should not be the deciding factor on abortion.

If a women was to decide to get an abortion and the father was opposed, does that give her the right to do so because it is a women's issue? After all, it takes two to conceive so shouldn't it be a man's issue and choice as well?

Paul, although i appreciate the tone and the way you approached your argument, that is without name calling and childish banter, i can't agree that "a compromise" is something you do when it comes to human life.

Additionally, there are thousands of worthy American couples dying to get their hands on American children through adoption. Again, our government has made it so costly and prohibitive that many seek to adopt children from overseas.

"So, when a fetus begins to have brain function and a heartbeat, it is alive. As soon as conception takes place, those cells have their own DNA different from both the mother and father essentially making it a unique human and not part of the mother. In my view aborting that fetus is murder...to me." A fetus starts at week 9, To clarify what you are saying, there is no brain function or heart beat at conception so is it ok to allow abortion before brain function occurs?

So from a females point of view, I'm all for abortion. I can only imagine some of the situations women who do opt for abortion have to go through. I fully agree men should have more choice, but frankly, that is not the current. So until men do slowly prove themselves to be equal on the parental front then it is the the females choice to keep the child or abort it. Frankly, if I was ever raped and I ended up pregnant, I would abort. And I would probably beat the crap out of any man or woman that stood in my way waving a anti-abortion poster. That's just my opinion, but what it comes down to for me, is it's MY choice, it affects ME. Not you.

What would you think if abortion was banned, but instead of having your own kid you were REQUIRED to take a pregnant teens unwanted baby ("You never know what you are going to get in a box of chocolates"). You would also have to pay for all the medical fees through the time they are 18 years old! How would you feel then? Is the bastard child not your problem? If you are not willing to do something yourself for the child how come it is your decision in the first place? If you are allowed to decide the mother has to keep her kid isn't it your duty then to support her and her child since YOU made the decision for her?

You must also be willing to allow more sex ed in schools and have birth control supplied for free at every school or you are not addressing the real problem. You can not stop people from having sex, but you can try to prevent pregnancy.

What about regulating having children in the first place? (There will come a time in the future that births will be regulated). China is already doing so for a reason, and it will eventually spread to the rest of the planet in the distant future. Can you imagine the ramifications if China disallowed abortions? China has almost 13 times more abortions than we do here in the US. Their country would quickly be overpopulated. Having more boys than girls, controlled by abortion, means less breeders available.

On Rod's theory all foreigners should be abolished and we should give the country back to the native Americans...after all we took something that wasn't ours and was already spoken for.

I must be bored on a rainy day, since I never get into religious/political conversations. Have fun!

I have to say that the first half of Ashlys comments are some of the most ridiculous things I've ever read. What makes you as a woman superior to me as a man parentally? It's ultimately your choice because that's the way we were born. I can't bear children since I don't have a womb, ovaries, etc. That does not automatically make a woman a better parent than I am. I agree with the latter comments but don't lump all men together.

Roe v Wade was argued on a lie. Mccovey was never raped, she lied under the urges of her attorney who herself was a self proclaimed feminist and activist. Mccovey has since denounced her part in the trial and has spoken openly how she was told to lie not only about the rape but about many other things as the trial went on.

Although this thread will go no where, since it came up let's be honest about what abortion is about. It's about money plain and simple. It's also a way that we can justify having no consequences for our actions. For every action there is a consequence. Let's not fool ourselves, right now in 17 states there is a law that a women can kill her baby within a certain time after it is born. I can't remember the legalities of it I would have to go research it but that doesn't change the fact that it is true.

As a Christian, we believe the soul enters the body at conception, that is why we argue so vehemently about this cause. There have been thousands of documentation about babies surviving the abortion and later being found alive when thought to be dead. Many Doctors provide late term abortions but nobody wants to talk about it. Photos of babies with ripped a part bodies give an actual visual of the horrors of abortion. Don't be fooled by terminology that sugar coats the brutality of the whole process.

Here is an article that paints a pretty accurate picture of what abortion (At least in the Medical community is all about)

“You can make a lot of money doing abortions,” revealed Anthony Levantino, a former abortion provider. “In my practice, we were averaging between $250 and $500 per abortion [in the 1980s]—and it was cash. It is the one time as a doctor you can say, ‘Either pay me up front or I’m not going to take care of you…. Either you have the money or you don’ About Money Former abortion clinic owner Carol Everett was asked, “What is the governing force behind the abortion industry?”

“Money,” Everett answered bluntly. “It’s a very lucrative business.”

Norma McCorvey, who was the “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade, recalled her experience working in an abortion clinic. “It was just a racket,” she said. “[The doctor] was just doing it for the money. He didn’t care about the women….”

Pro-abortion activists trumpet the importance of the so-called “right to choose,” yet virtually all accounts show that the abortion industry is not interested in providing women with alternatives; they are interested in profits. Debra Henry, who worked as an assistant at an abortion clinic, remembers, “The women were never given any type of alternatives to abortions.”

Nita Whitten worked as a secretary for a Dallas abortion clinic. “I was trained by a professional marketing director in how to sell abortions over the telephone,” she recounted. “The object was, when the girl called, to hook the sale so she wouldn’t get an abortion somewhere else, or adopt out her baby, or change her mind. We were doing it for the money.”

Some abortionists are more profitable than others.

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) is the nation’s largest abortion provider. From 1997 to 2005, its clinics performed 1,918,532 surgical abortions.

The organization is tremendously successful at marketing abortions. Even as the nation’s annual abortion rate fell, the number of abortions performed by PPFA clinics rose more than sixty percent.

In 2005 alone, Planned Parenthood abortion clinics ended the lives of 264,943 unborn babies—which lays a death toll at the feet of this organization greater than all the lives lost in the previous year to breast cancer, diabetes, HIV/AIDS, homicide, leukemia, melanoma, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, and suicide combined.

PS - I am not arguing here, I am stating my view points, and in my opinion, Abortion is murder plain and simple. Disclaimer, if you or a spouse has had an abortion, rememebr this, God still loves you, always will. There is not sin to large that you have ever done that can seperate you from him, he has never changed nor has he ever abandoned you, therefore I say this to you, fall on your face before God and let him know you honestly are sorry for the things you have done in and with your life. His blood covers every sin no matter how little or large, and believe me, I've had some doosies. So if you want a new lease on life, ask God who freely gives redemtion, his blood was shed for all of us. If you need help email me and I will even walk you through it. God bless

Agreed that the argument is based on when one believes that a fetus is considered alive. In my personal opinion, that is when the baby could live outside the womb on its own. Granted that is not an exact science thus why I believe that only early term abortions should be legal.

The argument that abortion dramatically affects the women who had them is silly. Having a baby and giving it up for adoption can have the same affects on both the baby and the mother.

"It's about money plain and simple" obviously its not about money or the government would be giving abortions on demand because it would be a lot cheaper to abort a child than support it on welfare or in the judicial system for the rest of its life.

Gods ways are not our ways Wes. When they brang the women caught in the very act of adultery and tried to catch Jesus with the question of what to do with her, what did he say to them?

To whom is without sin, let him cast the first stone! How brilliant Jesus was. Here was God on earth in the flesh, this women was caught in the very act of adultery which God hates. His response was one of love and wisdom. The angry mob turned one by one till there was no one left to accuse the women. Jesus said, where are your accusers? She said they are all gone. Jesus answered and said, neither do I accuse you, but go and sin no more. While it may seem insane to us, that the thought of a child rapist would have the same chance as you or I to get to heaven, where you err is we do not get there on our own merit, it's all what he did on the cross. If it were up to us to earn our way to heaven, nobody would be able to get there, we needed a substitute to take our place, if you haven't come to that place then thats between you and God, as for me, I realize my need for a savior, I will admit I am as the Bible says, a filthy rag. yet even so his blood has made me as white as snow. The longer I live, the more I realize this in my life. God loves you Wes, he has amazing plans for you, he gave you your intellect, he knew you before you were born, he knew what day you would arrive and what day you would exit this planet. You are one of the brightest people on this site, I've been impressed by a lot of what you write, but you were meant for so much more Wes. Stop fighting God and start seeking him. He who seeks will find and he who knocks the door will be open. Get in line with Gods will for your life and I believe God could use you to do mighty things for him.

Unconditional love and acceptance if you bow down. I'm sorry, I just can't relate to that concept, IMO it is worthless, I would rather beloved for my deeds and intentions than loved for my unconditional subservience.

Interesting conversations, I find myself somewhere in the middle. But I must say, Ashley, I find your insinuation demeaning and inappropriate. Try being a Father sometime.....

That being said, it is really tough to accept the argument of when life begins (aside from the "scientific" definition) is difficult to engage in when you see the ultrasound of your own children with a fetal heartbeat at 4 weeks. It is difficult to place a value on this simple fact that a heartbeat is present.....but no brain function. how about pain? I understand that there are no nerve tissues present....how about the pain of the parent who has no "choice" to abort this beating heart? Emotion has been taken out of the equation on the side of the "pro-Choice" members, because too feel something for the beating heart is to show weakness. And the "Pro_lifers" attach nothing BUT emotion the the heartbeat, with no regard to how it got there or the future the living child will face. Science can explain a lot, but it rarely explains everything. Tough guys who demand "abortions for all, its only tissue", and the cry of "its a baby, not a fetus...your all going to hell", just is too extreme to either side for me.

To all of you pro aborts out there, consider the case of Gianna Jessen. She survived a saline abortion. She was left badly burned and now suffers from cerebral palsy residual to the trauma of her birth. She is now active in the anti abortion movement. She asks the very poignant question: "If abortion is about women's rights, then what were my rights?" I for one believe that is a very legitimate question, and I would love to hear some thoughtful answers from those who believe that abortion is OK.

If abortions were made illegal, that will not stop anyone from getting an abortion who wants one. It may even make things worse by forcing women to seek out underground clinics or some other prehistoric means such as a coat hanger.

LOL, those who oppose killing captial murders are those of a higher conscience and believe we are better than those before us. Those same people are the ones FOR killing innocent babies.

We are a decaying society. We should make drugs legal because we are too pathetic to stop using them. Our own pleasure is more important than our society. We are gonna use them anyway. We should keep abortion legal because accountability simply isnt an option. We are too pathetic to excercise our "choice" when deciding to partake, or our "choice" when deciding to prevent. It take too much effort and maturity. We need the "choice" for AFTER pleasure has been satisfied. If we didnt have this "choice" legally, then we would just be in back alleys getting unsanitary procedures. It is much better to risk our lives in the back alley than risk our lives being RUINED by accountability.

We are a decaying society. We should make drugs legal because we are too pathetic to stop using them.

LOL (sadly w/ a face palm)... This comes from someone who has advocated turning the middle east to glass at the slightest provocation. When you say "we are too pathetic to stop using them", what you really mean is we are too pathetic to take draconian measures to insure that no one is allowed to corrupt the world of your ideals.

I still don't see how a murderer killing a pregnant woman is charged with multiple homicide if abortion is legal.

I guess it's consistent for an anti-abortionist to think that if abortion is legal then murders should be able to force their will on mothers and kill their fetuses. One way or the other you get someone elses will forced on women.

I didn't say they shouldn't get charged/convicted of murdering the Mother but why add in the unborn child if abortion is legal? It is a double standard. Killing two people brings harsher penalties and it should, but all the states that charge/convict multiple homicide in the cases of fetal homicide don't really have a leg to stand on.

Spoken like a lawyer defending the murderer. What do you think is the appropriate penalty for someone killing someone else's fetus by their own volition? Are you suggesting that there should only be a minor penalty?

The value of the fetus is not a factor of random strangers. For a women that is pregnant with a wanted child, that fetus is her baby. If the defense lawyer could show the woman was scheduled for an abortion then I would agree that a murder charge for the fetus would be inappropriate. Although I don't necessarily agree that killing two people should bring a harsher penalty. Sometimes one should be enough.

depoint I think you make a really good point and I can see where John is coming from as well. But!! It does seem like double standards when somebody who kills a mother and her unborn child is guilty of a double homicide whereas if that same mother decides to terminate that pregnancy.....?? Well it's not really a life then is it? It's just a foetus. If we apply those standards then the murderer is guilty of killing the mother. But did he take another life as well? Not according to the standards pro abortionists live by.

Paul and Melissa can't read for context. How appropriate. The Mexican hyperbole I threw out there for you is exactly the same argument you make in regard for abortion. You know the ol drain on society, who is going to pay for them and yada, yada. You don't find that a issue but I say something about other living people just like you do about babies and it is offensive? While I don't really feel like that about people (including mexicans), I know for a fact that you two do about children. So to you use Paul's term would it be appropriate to label you two as repulsive people.

The argument that abortion dramatically affects the women who had them is silly. Having a baby and giving it up for adoption can have the same affects on both the baby and the mother.

That is absolutely false. There are organizations that deal with the mental effects of abortion. I know women who are active in those organizations. There are support groups all over the place in our area alone for women who had them. Typically for the ones who do seek help (typically after they have families later), there are many more who do suffer in silence. Just because women are not out there talking about it on Oprah does not mean it isn't there. Do a little research. If you really are for the women, then look into it.

My stance is I am somewhat pro choice since God does give you a choice. I do agree somewhat with Paul Ross above. I think he gave a very measured response. I also agree with Flight. I think he nailed exactly what I was talking about and I know someone who went through exactly what he described. It was all about the sale of the abortion. It had nothing to do with what is best for the women. I think mid and late term abortion should be banned. Those pictures that flight put up before were actually pretty early in the process.

No, I was saying that if we were a thriving society, we wouldnt need laws against them, nor the subsequent "give up" letting them run rampant.

Anti-drug law and anti-abortion law are society's attempts to stop the decay but it just delays the inevitable.

A thriving society would never put themselves in the position we have put ourselves in. We have actually forced ourselves to draw a line at when we can kill our offspring!! We then make up some one-in-trillion tragic scenario to justify a procedure to use as a convienence 99.9999% of the time. A rising society makes it harder for stupidity to thrive, not easier.

You guys are misguided in your thinking. What you want is for a murderer to go unpunished to make your point. People who believe that abortion should be legal aren't concerned about the rights of a murderer who kills a woman's fetus.

Who believes it ok for someone to go around killing a fetus in the womb without the consent of the mother? Maybe the problem is that a law specific to that occurrence isn't on the books. Not that people who are ok with legal abortion think it's fine to let murderers get off. Only the anti-abortionists are suggesting that.

When it comes down to it, I just don't think it's right to force (by law) a woman to carry a baby to term. It's such an obtrusive and burdensome thing on a woman's body that when it comes down to it, it has to be up to the woman to go through with it or not. I am also against mid and late-term abortions as then you are getting to the point where the baby might survive outside the womb. I see arguments on both sides, and it's a tough thing, but I really just think you can't take the woman's right to choose away from her.

As for what any religion says as far as when life starts, who cares? The beliefs of any particular religion have no place in making laws - at least not in this country.

That's a good one Jason. What kind of wacky history courses have you been attending? I don't recall any period in American history where there were no bad people.

Maybe you could be more specific as to what you meant by a thriving society as I thought you meant a society with no problems. I still get the drift that you mean the good old days when there were draconian punishment for not conforming. Maybe your desired times go back to a good ole witch burning.

I am not sure how one is supposed to take a "hyperbole" about their ethnicity saying that we weren't planned, even though I was born and raised in California. Also considering I was gave birth two weeks ago, I am not sure how that equates me not caring about children. Again, you try to fit everyone into a nice neat polarized box of us vs. them, but unfortunately not everyone fits into those nice pretty boxes.

John - you are missing the point. Nobody is talking about letting murderers off the hook. I am curious,even puzzled that, by the laws we have chosen to live by, it is called a homicide.

My question is why, when the mother chooses to kill the child (and if the murderer is killing it, then so is she), it is not homicide? Or does it now become legal homicide? Or do we give it a completely different name because we are not murderers? Is the fetus a life or isn't it. That is the question. People cannot have it both ways.

Personally I feel it is a double homicide but then I also feel abortion is murder. If it isn't then the murderer is not guilty of murdering the unborn. He could be charged for a whole raft of offences but not murder. Because a fetus is not a life. Is it??

"So until men do slowly prove themselves to be equal on the parental front then it is the the females choice to keep the child or abort it."

Ashly, That is a totally unfair statement. I ran a daycare for 21 years. I can honestly say I have seen some fathers that were better at parenting than the mothers. Even some step fathers that were better than the biological mother. I am a 53 year old women. When Roe V wade was going on, it was the girls my age seeking abortions. I had more than a few friends in school that had abortions. In their words it was "so they can continue with their studies". As they matured, not one of those women believes that they made the right choice. A few have really suffered with the guilt. Two were not able to conceive after marriage and one of them had to go to Russia to adopt. The other has been in and out of counseling for almost 30 years trying to deal with the guilt, and not being able to have a child. I know one couple that ended up marrying and now have children. They both say they feel their family is missing something because they aborted their first child. So yes, it does even effect the men. I believe that part of the problem is that their is not time for these young girls to really make a well thought out decision. They are scared and looking for the easiest way out of the problem. Their is not enough time to have proper counseling before having to make the decision to abort. Yet,the decision has a lasting effect that they are forced to live with. It is a very sad situation to be in. I think that when people have to go to other countries to adopt and some are paying for surrogate mothers, abortions should not be an option.

Chris are you in favor of allowing abortion before fetus stage? (9 weeks)

While I would personally never choose an abortion myself at any term, I would not force my personal view on others but I do think 12 weeks is too late in development and would be in favor of making the latest legal abortion @ 9 weeks.

Oh and yes I'm in favor of double homicide to align with the legal abortion term.

It's definitely a controversial topic. Even how to write such a law is tricky. If someone kills a woman who is 2 days pregnant, does that count as "murdering" the zygote? If someone beats that same woman causing a miscarriage, what is the charge? Where do you draw the line? Depending on how it is written, a man who forces his partner to take emergency contraception could be charged with "murder."

I think that to be consistent with current law these types of cases need to be viewed and charged as infringing on the autonomy of a pregnant woman to make her own reproductive choices, not necessarily as "murder."

Wacky? You dont think civilizations have risen and fallen? Back in the day thriving societies moved past things like canibalism and created written language, etc. More recent would be our attempts at fairness from the severing from the brits to equality among races and gender.

The founding fathers didnt have laws against canibalism on the books because civilization had moved past that practice. It wasnt even on their radar. It wasnt a point of debate. You know things are on the decline if we actually have to discuss where the line of acceptance should be drawn for killing our own offspring. We have devolved that much.

Jason, I'm not sure I follow... Where in the timeline is this "thriving" society you speak of? I don't think women would look at things before the 1920s as "thriving" seeing as how they weren't allowed to vote until then - that means they have had that right for less than half the time our country has been around. And how about voting and other civil rights for minorities? That wasn't until a few decades ago - so is that when we started "thriving?" Or is it just in the last 30ish years that our thriving has fallen off?

Chris, I think the answer is obvious. The law hasn't been challenged to the extent that a further distinction has been made. I don't think I'm missing the point as I understand the point completely. The point is that you are confused as to how one case can be considered a murder and the other it's not.

Obviously it would be better if a law was written to make serious penalties for the so called fetus murderer, call it something else, and then it wouldn't be a problem.

Wes, the fall of society is when people start thinking we should all have healthcare, that we shouldn't indiscriminately kill people in other countries just because we feel a bit threatened, and oh yeah people start thinking our leader talks a bit too much like Jesus.

Legal Abortion, under the color of United States Law, assumes that the "fetus" cannot live outside of the womb without the support of the "host" parent. Simple, to the point, and very sterile. It is the choice of the "host" to abort the pregnancy at any segment of this timeline in order to remain on the correct side of the law. An act of Murder gives the "host" no ability to make the decision to keep the "fetus" or not. It is assumed, in a court of law, that the "host" INTENDED to keep the "fetus" until natural childbirth was attained. Therefore, the murderer removed the ability for the "host" to see the pregnancy through to fruition. Hence, it is the assumption that the "fetus" would have been naturally gestated and born. Cold, calculating and sterile. No emotion, no crying over lost lives, snuffed out fetal heartbeats or crushed parents. If this is where we are headed (and we are already more than half way there) then I agree with Jason. The demise of a compassionate, feeling and volunteer society for enrichment of our youth, and support for the common good is leaving us. Replacing it are lawyers, selfish and greedy citizens with no more attachment to a living child than for a piece of fiberglass and aluminum that floats on water. What a great replacement.

Chris, my only problem with your post is that it suggests that an abortion is no different than a stranger deciding take the fetus of an unwilling woman. If you can't see any distinction then there is no further reason to argue this point.

However, the real question is if it's a significant crime. What's important is how does the crime impact society. IMO a third party killing a woman's fetus by his own volition is a serious crime tantamount to murder. So give it another name and the problem is solved.